G'day Erich,
I have a few questions re 3D video I'm hoping you can assist with, and
would appreciate your opinion.
As this is pertinent to frame rate perfomance in Nascar2, forthcoming
MS CART etc, I believe this discussion is relevant to
rec.autos.simulators and not 'off topic' here. However if some are of
different opinion and offended, please excuse this moot infraction and
accept my apology.
I note the Canopus Pure 3D (Voodoo) has a total 6Mb of EDO which
they've allocated *2Mb to frame buffer* and *4Mb to texture*.
Conversly Intergraph's new Voodoo *Rush*/Alliance also has 6Mb of EDO
of which they've differently chosen to allocate *4Mb to frame buffer*
and ONLY *2Mb to texture*. Given the amount of texture mapping
becoming common in most flight & auto sims these days I have the
following questions.
Is 2 Mb texture memory on the Intergraph Rush actually going to be
sufficient for *excellent* performance, and why IYO have Intergraph
chosen to conversly double frame buffer instead of texture vs Canopus
decision in their Voodoo?
Overall, IYO how does the Intergraph Voodoo Rush stack up performance
wise now (ex-hype) vs say a Diamond "Monster3D" 4Mb or Canopus 6Mb
Voodoo combined with a fast 2D card. Is it an approximately equal
single card solution or a relative lemon? (ie: IYO is one still better
off with say an S3 or ET6000/Voodoo combo despite the non-windowing
capabilities of the base Voodoo?
It would appear that of the straight Voodoo cards, Canopus decision to
use an additional 2Mb for texture mapping is a superb one making it
the preferred card of the Voodoo line?
Thanks.
Keiron
*
*
* Descartes (1596-1650)
